> John Cowan wrote:
> >The status of U+1100-11FF and U+AC00-D7A3 is doubtful. Officially,
> >the first block (Hangul Jamo) is halfwidth and the second block
> >(Hangul Syllables) is neither, but they both look fullwidth to me.
> Both Hangul Jamo and syllables at Row 11 and Row AC ~ D7 are all
> fullwidth. There are halfwidth Hangul Jamo at Row FF.
Yes, that is what I think too, as it seems reasonable. Unfortunately,
it contradicts the letter of the Unicode Standard (p. 6-130):
# In the context of conversion to and from such mixed-width encodings,
# all characters in the General Scripts area [i.e. 0000-1FFF]
# should be construed as halfwidth (*hankaku*) characters.
That purports to include the combining jamo at 1100-11FF. The rest of
the paragraph says:
# All characters in the CJK Phonetics and Symbols area [i.e. 3000-33FF]
# and the Unified CJK Ideograph area [i.e. 4E00-9FFF], along with
# the characters in the CJK Compatibility Ideographs [i.e. F900-FAFF],
# CJK Compatibility Forms [i.e. FE30-FE4F], and Small Form Variants
# blocks [i.e. FE50-FE6F], should be construed as fullwidth (*zenkaku*)
# characters. Other Compatibility Area [i.e. F900-FFFF] characters
# outside of the current block should be construed as halfwidth
# characters. The characters of the Symbols Area are neutral regarding
# their width semantics.
Note that the Standard is silent on the halfwidth/fullwidth status of the
Hangul Syllables area.
As far as I can tell, ISO 10646 is silent on the terms "halfwidth" and
"fullwidth" except to say that the characters so named are provided
-- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan email@example.com e'osai ko sarji la lojban
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:36 EDT